Premium
Optimally Oriented Remote Triggering in the Coso Geothermal Region
Author(s) -
AlfaroDiaz Richard,
Velasco Aaron A.,
Pankow Kristine L.,
Kilb Debi
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of geophysical research: solid earth
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.983
H-Index - 232
eISSN - 2169-9356
pISSN - 2169-9313
DOI - 10.1029/2019jb019131
Subject(s) - seismology , induced seismicity , geology , geothermal gradient , waveform , focal mechanism , stress field , magnitude (astronomy) , pacific plate , geophysics , subduction , engineering , telecommunications , tectonics , physics , radar , structural engineering , astronomy , finite element method
Defining the nature of faulting, the stress needed to trigger earthquakes, and the stress state of faults remains fundamental to understanding the earthquake cycle. Studying remote dynamic triggering allows us to probe faults to systemically address the fundamental physical mechanisms of faulting. Using 13 years of data (2004–2016) from the EarthScope USArray Transportable Array and the Southern California Seismic Network, we search for remotely triggered seismicity in an extended region encompassing the Coso Geothermal Field (CGF+), California. We first apply a short term to long‐term average ratio detector to high‐pass (5 Hz) filtered waveforms spanning ±5 hr encompassing 211 M ≥ 7 global earthquakes. We visually inspect these waveforms to identify uncatalogued local earthquakes. We use the augmented local earthquake catalog to investigate remote earthquake triggering in the CGF+ region. Of the 211 remote mainshocks, we find 32 (15%) produce a statistically significant increase in seismicity following the P wave arrival in CGF+. An additional nine mainshocks had local earthquakes coincident with the surface waves passage but lacked a significant rate increase. Of the 41 (19%) triggering mainshocks, 28 and 13 exhibit instantaneous and delayed triggering, respectively. We find no correlation between triggering and mainshock depth, peak dynamic stress, nor mainshock focal mechanism type. Instead, results suggest the CGF+ may be optimally oriented for remote triggering from mainshocks in the West Pacific and South America and propose the reason for this is that the transient dynamic stresses align favorably with the local stress field (most compressive horizontal stress, SHmax) to promote triggering.